QuoteReplyTopic: Trash call from umpire US open during finals Posted: 12/23/2018 at 12:36am

https://youtu.be/-LnTvOzGGBo?t=38154

what kind of trash call is that? That serve is as legal as it gets. The umpire is at an angle where he can't see and serve then proceed to fault wang. The reason for the fault is the toss is too low. But AFAI can see, the ball is tossed above his head, it leaves the hand but his hand follow through the motion which is pretty normal. USATT need to make sure US open is not a jokeland for garbage ref, please.

Probably not many noticed how big of a difference did that trash call did to the game. That call made wang give up and doesn't care and went mayham for the next few points. Luckily he made those mayham shots and get himself into the game; went completely relax and 11-1 Ryohei next set. Then proceed to win the US open.

Many of Eugene's serves have low toss. Remember 6 inches is measured from the time the ball leaves his hand. If the ball is released near the top of it's trajectory, it won't be 6 inches. It doesn't matter if the ball is tossed above his head.

- In the second, the hand is starting to drop. Note that Eugene's hand has chased the ball up to that point. That is, the ball is rising, but so is the hand. The ball is not being projected 6 inches above the palm.

- The third pic shows the ball's maximum height. The hand continues to fall. But it doesn't matter as the rule is about the ball being projected above the hand, not how far or fast you can drop the hand below the ball.

- The fourth pic shows contact almost half a metre to the left of where the ball left the palm.

So the serve was correctly faulted because the ball wasn't projected far enough above the palm, nor vertically enough.

Now, many other high-level players get away with worse. But that doesn't mean the umpire was wrong in this case.

I would suggest 100% of Ma Longs, Dima's serves etc are illegal if that one is.

I agree, a lot of other pro players' serves are illegal.

Look at the difference between picture 1 and 3.

In picture 3, the ball has not been projected above the hand from the starting position shown in picture 1. Instead, the hand has dropped from picture 2, which shows how high the hand chased the ball up before the hand started to drop.

Whether it's Ding Ning, Ma Long or Maharu Yoshimura - if any player doesn't want to feel the stress of being service faulted, they can just serve legally.

6 inches is about the height of the net. I think the toss is high enough. Most of his serve is about the same, if it was to be called, it should be called a lot earlier, not at the crucial game and point. I think the point effect both players in this case.

Picture 1 shows that it is also a fault because the ball is hidden from the opponent by the hand. Before making comments on service calls by umpires people should remember that according to the rules it is the responsibility of the player to serve so the umpires can be sure that the requirements of the laws have been satisfied. It seems obvious that the toss was not vertical and it is very likely that the ball was hidden. As for the height, the hand follows the ball up so the umpire would have had difficulty determining exactly when the ball left the hand and therefore the exact height of the toss. So I can see three reasons why the umpire would be justified in calling a fault.

The Laws of table tennis set out the requirements for a legal service not Ma Long. Perhaps the ITTF should support the umpires a lot more and the top players spend some more time learning the service rules and perfecting legal serves. A few years ago I watched the Australian junior boys play a teams match at the World junior championship and all 3 payers were faulted. Their immediate reaction was to revert to a completely different serve because they weren't confident of being able to serve the original serve legally. These kids paid big money for coaching but obviously got no feedback from their coaches regarding the legality of their serves.

I have no sympathy for any player whose service is faulted. So who do I think is to blame for the service mess? The ITTF, the players and the coaches, not the umpires.

Pay an umpire a professional wage and you get professional results... so that you would get more of the right calls... and yes, great majority of pros serves are blatantly illegal or would in a reasonable person judgment not satisfy the requirements to an umpire.

...still, there was one match... I think it was women's finals...(EDIT - I think the U21 men's finals) where the umpire wasn't taking any crap from players and calling it... that dude earned his small paycheck.

Edited by BH-Man - 12/23/2018 at 8:10pm

Korea Foreign Table Tennis Club
Search for us on Facebook: koreaforeignttc

- In the second, the hand is starting to drop. Note that Eugene's hand has chased the ball up to that point. That is, the ball is rising, but so is the hand. The ball is not being projected 6 inches above the palm.

- The third pic shows the ball's maximum height. The hand continues to fall. But it doesn't matter as the rule is about the ball being projected above the hand, not how far or fast you can drop the hand below the ball.

- The fourth pic shows contact almost half a metre to the left of where the ball left the palm.

So the serve was correctly faulted because the ball wasn't projected far enough above the palm, nor vertically enough.

Now, many other high-level players get away with worse. But that doesn't mean the umpire was wrong in this case.

6 inches is about the height of the net. I think the toss is high enough. Most of his serve is about the same, if it was to be called, it should be called a lot earlier, not at the crucial game and point. I think the point effect both players in this case.

I watched it in person. I didn't think it was a fault, but Eugene's serves are not ITTF perfect, he is a bit slow to get his hand out of the way also.

I will say we all thought that call was the turning point of the match. It upset Eugene a bit and he played with more focus after that.

6 inches is about the height of the net. I think the toss is high enough. Most of his serve is about the same, if it was to be called, it should be called a lot earlier, not at the crucial game and point. I think the point effect both players in this case.

I watched it in person. I didn't think it was a fault, but Eugene's serves are not ITTF perfect, he is a bit slow to get his hand out of the way also.

I will say we all thought that call was the turning point of the match. It upset Eugene a bit and he played with more focus after that.

I think it also effected RK. He played less aggressive and his serve was less effective afterwards

If you care to read law 2.6.4 you will find that it states that the ball shall not be hidden from the receiver from the time the service commences until the time the ball is struck. The service commences with the ball resting on the stationary hand. If you look closely at picture 1 you will see that the servers hand is clearly hiding the ball from the receiver at the moment it is leaving the hand.

If you care to read law 2.6.4 you will find that it states that the ball shall not be hidden from the receiver from the time the service commences until the time the ball is struck. The service commences with the ball resting on the stationary hand. If you look closely at picture 1 you will see that the servers hand is clearly hiding the ball from the receiver at the moment it is leaving the hand.

Kaden Xu got into big trouble with his serve in the U21 men's final against Michael Tran. I think the ump kept calling him him for a non-vertical toss and also hiding contact with his head. Tran kept whining about not being able to see contact but the video did not show much (of course, that is not the same as being at the table). I don't know if that influenced the ump, but it seemed to be on Xu's mind on many serves. Still a fun match to watch.

mhnh007, I didn't say it was called for being a hidden serve. I know that it was called for a low toss. If you care to read my first post I was stating all of the possible reasons an umpire may call a fault. When I look at picture 1 posted by hangdog the hand appears to be clearly obscuring the ball from the sight of the receiver at the time the ball is tossed which is illegal under law 2.6.4. As I said in my first post, under the laws of table tennis the umpire would be quite within his rights to call the service for low toss, not vertical or hiding the ball from the receiver. If you are going to make statements disagreeing with my opinion please state why.

Doesn't the fact that the forum members have different views whether the toss was high enough show that it was a reasonable decision for the umpire to call a fault given that the laws allow to do so if he is unsure. My personal opinion is that the toss was high enough but I have looked at the video multiple times unlike the umpire.

Doesn't the fact that the forum members have different views whether the toss was high enough show that it was a reasonable decision for the umpire to call a fault given that the laws allow to do so if he is unsure. My personal opinion is that the toss was high enough but I have looked at the video multiple times unlike the umpire.

I think this point is seriously under-appreciated by people who criticize umpires' calls. The rules don't just say the umpire "can" make a call if he's unsure, they say he must make that call. Umpires are supposed to make calls any time they think there might be problem. They have the right to give a warning instead of a penalty, which is good if they think the violation is marginal or unintentional.

Also, I've had a couple of conversations with professionals, both Chinese and European, on serves. The impression I get is that they look for a competitive edge and will push the boundaries as far as they are allowed (by the umpires). But if the umpires calls them, they have the skills to make their serves more legal, or to choose different serves that won't upset the umpire. So they understand the risk of what they do -- for them, it's a calculated risk.

People need to stop harassing umpires who make calls. They are doing their job, which involves judgment calls. If you don't like their judgments, then go become an umpire yourself. I have a bigger problem with umpires who let players or fan intimidate them.

Finally, it's always frustrated me that umpires will almost never call hidden serves, but I fault the rules for that. They make it too hard for umpires to judge whether a serve is hidden.

Yes it seems to be hidden from the receiver. Picture 1 shows the hand directly in front of the ball which would make it hidden to the receiver at that time. The ball must be visible to the receiver at all times. As he throws the ball sideways and partially backwards the fingers come up temporarily obscuring the ball. What don't you understand about the service rules?

The toss must be 16 cm after leaving the hand. Nowhere in the rules or umpires training documents have I found anything that says there must be a 16 cm gap between the hand and the ball. When you toss the ball up the hand will naturally rise a bit after the ball leaves the hand. This gives the impression of a lesser distance between the height of the toss and the height of the hand when the ball leaves it.

Yes it seems to be hidden from the receiver. Picture 1 shows the hand directly in front of the ball which would make it hidden to the receiver at that time. The ball must be visible to the receiver at all times. As he throws the ball sideways and partially backwards the fingers come up temporarily obscuring the ball. What don't you understand about the service rules?

I think in rules says it must be visible for receiver and umpire. not only for receiver

Yes it seems to be hidden from the receiver. Picture 1 shows the hand directly in front of the ball which would make it hidden to the receiver at that time. The ball must be visible to the receiver at all times. As he throws the ball sideways and partially backwards the fingers come up temporarily obscuring the ball. What don't you understand about the service rules?

I think in rules says it must be visible for receiver and umpire. not only for receiver

2.06.04: From the start of service until it is struck,
the ball . . . shall not be hidden from the receiver by the server or
his or her doubles partner or by anything they wear or carry.

2.06.05: As soon as the ball has been projected, the server’s free
arm and hand shall be removed from the space between the ball and the
net.

2.06.06: It is the responsibility of the player to serve so that the
umpire or the assistant umpire can be satisfied that he or she complies
with the requirements of the Laws, and either may decide that a service
is incorrect.

2.06.06.01: If either the umpire or the assistant umpire is not sure
about the legality of a service he or she may, on the first occasion in a
match, interrupt play and warn the server; but any subsequent service
by that player or his or her doubles partner which is not clearly legal
shall be considered incorrect.

Doesn't the fact that the forum members have different views whether the toss was high enough show that it was a reasonable decision for the umpire to call a fault given that the laws allow to do so if he is unsure. My personal opinion is that the toss was high enough but I have looked at the video multiple times unlike the umpire.

I think this point is seriously under-appreciated by people who criticize umpires' calls. The rules don't just say the umpire "can" make a call if he's unsure, they say he must make that call. Umpires are supposed to make calls any time they think there might be problem. They have the right to give a warning instead of a penalty, which is good if they think the violation is marginal or unintentional.

Also, I've had a couple of conversations with professionals, both Chinese and European, on serves. The impression I get is that they look for a competitive edge and will push the boundaries as far as they are allowed (by the umpires). But if the umpires calls them, they have the skills to make their serves more legal, or to choose different serves that won't upset the umpire. So they understand the risk of what they do -- for them, it's a calculated risk.

People need to stop harassing umpires who make calls. They are doing their job, which involves judgment calls. If you don't like their judgments, then go become an umpire yourself. I have a bigger problem with umpires who let players or fan intimidate them.

Finally, it's always frustrated me that umpires will almost never call hidden serves, but I fault the rules for that. They make it too hard for umpires to judge whether a serve is hidden.

Although ITTF could get better, easier to define and enforce rules from the efforts of a panel of 10 yr olds… reasonable person judgment would not (edit) blame the rules... they are clear enough to fault the player if the serve is not obviously legal enough as defined by the rules.

If we look at the FH pendulum serves of nearly every pro... we can see the pros progressively breaking the serve rule incrementally more... why not? It isn't a foul until the umpire calls it...

if anything, blame US TT FORUMERS, the TT FANS, PARENTS, COACHES, MEDIA EXECS, PLAYERS, NATL ASSNs and anyone else we have in mind. That is the crowd who is setting he environment to pressure umpires and "Blame" them for player violations.

If a football star on a team committed a crime that no one saw (so thought the star player), but a witness comes forward to identify the star player who committed said crime... and as a result is subsequently arrested, charged, and incarcerated for that crime... then nearly the entire community would "BLAME" the witness for the star player's arrest in an effort to transfer responsibility of the crime to the witness who dutifully reported the crime...

SCREW THAT MENTALITY.

If an umpire makes a correct call, umpire should not be harassed privately or publicly about it.

Our problem with umpires in our sport of TT is umpires are not uniformly trained and do not have the personal courage consistently across the field of umpires to make the correct call every time. The fear of harassment is real. Many are not mentally strong willed enough to stand up and cope with their correct decisions, so they do not make them.

I almost do not blame an umpire for not making a call... they do not get paid enough money to act as a professional, often they are paid less than minimum wage for their work.

Sure, throwing money at this is not gunna suddenly give umpires a collective backbone. There are more serious root issues besides the pay.

Edited by BH-Man - 12/23/2018 at 8:08pm

Korea Foreign Table Tennis Club
Search for us on Facebook: koreaforeignttc

No one could expect a single umpire to buck the system alone, even if he was plainly following the rules as written.

Back in the 90's the NBA decided that the Pistons/Knicks style of physical defense was bad for the game. So during the off season they announced and described exactly how the refs were being instructed to call hand checks and physical defense going forward. The start of the next season was a bit rough (in fact i think the NBA did this twice) but in the long run the game has been vastly better.

Clearly the ITTF could do this, and the players would adapt. Since they do not, I guess we must assume they don't see this as much of an issue.

Sometimes I use big words I don't fully understand to make myself seem more photosynthesis

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum